User talk:Weatherlawyer

Hello Weatherlawyer,

Thanks for your amendments to the list. I would like to publish an article about the "Compañía de Salitres y Ferrocarril de Antofagasta", a company often cited but seldom known. I have worked out a stub or a little bit more in User:Keysanger/sandbox. Would you review the proposal?. That would be great!. --Keysanger (talk) 17:38, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to understand the way that Chilean nitrate would be used in gunpowder but I see that it was most likely used in fertiliser and the potassium salts retained for defence. The British blocked the rest of Europe's supply, leading to German development of Ammonia and Nitrogen Oxides. The year 1883 was a very important year in the USA. It marked the end of the cowboy era and total disregard of any human rights belonging to original inhabitants, the original holocaust so of course the interference hazard from the USA in South America is an important aspect of your country's history. You are more likely to be familiar with the history of United Fruit than I am, so you already know most of this.

1883 was the year that Kratakatau erupted; famously bad winters and the end of the Pacific War. Both the politics of the USA and the severe weather must have played a large part in the ending of that war. You will have to look at what happened in Antofagasta and the desert to see what knock-on effects it would have had.

What I am really interested in is a compendium of all the world's natural resources. Finding the sites of the US coal and iron mines is difficult despite their history of freedom of information. Locating anything in Britain is ridiculously hard. Stuff from Australia isn't bad but your work is a world leader. Would you do an explanation of how they obtained the produce?

I think your links away from the Wikipedia should go into the footnotes with a numbering system linking from the text to the footnotes. That way the reader can ignore the links unless he wishes to do further research. Then he can find them all together as one, later.

Are you going to do an article on natural extraction? These are the things so easily lost to history. For example we no longer know how iron was originally produced. How did the original surveyor discover the product and know what to do about it?

It is the same with the guano and phosphate quarrying.Weatherlawyer (talk) 14:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

S U P E R !!

thanks for the corrections. Perhaps, you may find some technical details about nitrate in The rise and fall of the salitre (sodium nitrate) industry . I will soon upload an image with the very first nitrate production process (called paradas). Later came the Gamboni, then the Shank process and the last one was the Guggenheim method.

The references in the text are html-linked to the footnotes, and in a wikipedia article (no talk pages), when you mouse over the reference number a little window open and shows the complete text and links of the reference.

You want to know how much does the world cost? I tell you : € 5 x 10E15 = € 5,000,000,000,000,000 that is € 750,000 for every one on the earth.^[1]

Thanks again, --Keysanger (talk) 15:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have just come from the house of an old friend that was a bricklayer and wrote about his experiences in a story about Red Ash the use of coal tip waste after the disaster called Aberfan. I should get him to write about that for the Wikipedia as it is something that will be lost in history soon.

The odd thing about Stoke on Trent is that the weather is the perfect opposite to yours with almost permanent cloud cover. In the days of the coal pits it was virtually perpetual smog.

How much was 10 cents worth in those days? If a bag takes 10 minutes to fill with guano or salt a man can fill 6 in an hour and 60 in a ten hour day. So each man was earning 600 cents for the government every day. I imagine there was a lot of bad feeling about that. I doubt he would be earning a dollar a day in that hot equatorial sun. "What" he must have been thinking "were rich English farmers earning?" Less than him probably. Only the rich get rich when they find out what the natives can be robbed of. The poor can do all their fighting for them, as is happening in Venezuela now as the rich vie with the USA to get their hands on the oil.

Do you have figures for how much value that commodity rises and falls with cycles of plenty and poverty? How did the el Ninos and La Ninas affect the trade?

Take as your datum the eruption of Krakatau and make the columns out to about 11 years: tropics of the moon..Weatherlawyer (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Taking the piss has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Taking the piss was changed by Weatherlawyer (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.986344 on 2015-01-22T21:58:16+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:58, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quite all right but someone ought to sort out that piffle. The idea that a canal boatman wouldn't stink of piss if he was in the trade is ridiculous. Who the hell would take such a trip on anyway? And who would be supplying the piss?

In those days you picked up the cargo as you went you never stuck to a regular contract. That would be handled by the company you operated the boat for.

Where would dyers get urine from? They wouldn't go far for it and what latrines have ever been plumbed into canal boats?

It is beyond reason.Weatherlawyer (talk) 01:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BiologicalMe. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Kent Hovind seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. BiologicalMe (talk) 15:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you made a mistake. I think you are a self opinionated fool. But then so am I. The problem is is that you are not only a self opinionated fool but stupid with it.

The Kent Horvind page is a nasty, bigoted, opinion piece and you can do what the hell you like with it. I have no more respect for this magazine than I would have for the Mirror Group Newspapers if I had any opinion for them in respect of anything.

You are fond of making stupid edits but stupid enough to overindulge yourself. The term "for a long time" is well known in English, a language I am quite familiar with. I can't say I have ever heard of the term: "for a long amount of time". But then, you are stupid and probably will be for an exceptionally long "amount" of time.

Weatherlawyer (talk) 00:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Henry Tizard, you may be blocked from editing. ‎ --David Biddulph (talk) 08:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Minorhistorian. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Supermarine Spitfire variants: specifications, performance and armament without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I have restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. If you are going to remove properly referenced material because you have a different opinion, it is up to you to add properly referenced information supporting your opinion; otherwise leave things alone. ◆Min✪rhist✪rian◆MTalk 23:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Feet of clay. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Mojoworker (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use talk pages for inappropriate discussions. Acroterion (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you add defamatory content to Wikipedia again, as you did at Talk:Barack Obama, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Acroterion (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at World Trade Center (1973-2001), you may be blocked from editing. David J Johnson (talk) 21:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 01:44, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]